The INT that Wasn't

[Alphadawg7]

Listen you maroon, I was taking things to an extreme to demonstrate a point. Obviously making points escapes you, but hey, I don't blame you. I blame your parents.

 

Seriously, make a point? Come on man, what point could you possibly be making by inventing a scenario that will never occur? What value did that have to the conversation because you can do that with any rule?

[BEAST MODE BABY!]

Seriously, make a point? Come on man, what point could you possibly be making by inventing a scenario that will never occur? What value did that have to the conversation because you can do that with any rule?

 

Listen, I will try to make this real simple like for ya.

 

If a player can be fully in the end zone, yet still be called out of bounds, then the rule needs to be amended. Period. End of story. My "unrealistic" scenario was merely a creative way to demonstrate that point. Which was apparently lost on you.

[akm0404]

Listen, I will try to make this real simple like for ya.

 

If a player can be fully in the end zone, yet still be called out of bounds, then the rule needs to be amended. Period. End of story. My "unrealistic" scenario was merely a creative way to demonstrate that point. Which was apparently lost on you.

 

Um, you are being ridiculous here. There is nothing out there quite as awkward and uncomfortable to read as someone on the wrong side of the dummy line telling someone else they are being dumb.

 

Your "unrealistic" scenario illustrates no point. Because a herd of vicious yaks could overrun the field, and a player could climb onto said yak and rumble for a touchdown, you don't need to change the rules.

 

The end zone can not be littered with bodies such that you can dance over top of the corpses straight out of bounds. A group of defenders can not pick up a player and carry them out of bounds.

 

The rules are simple - you are not fully in the end zone if you are flying through the air, or riding on a yak, or if you jump in the air and land on another player and roll out of bounds before you touch with the proper part(s) of your body. Sorry.

[Alphadawg7]

Listen, I will try to make this real simple like for ya.

 

If a player can be fully in the end zone, yet still be called out of bounds, then the rule needs to be amended. Period. End of story. My "unrealistic" scenario was merely a creative way to demonstrate that point. Which was apparently lost on you.

 

They already amended that rule this year! Its called the FORCE OUT RULE...what is so difficult for you to understand about this? 2009 this would have been an INT under the "No force out rule"...they took that rule out which means any player forced out of bounds because of contact from another player is OUT. I wont hear you crying when McGee pushes a WR out of the back of the endzone to save a TD that would have been a TD if allowed to come down with the ball.

 

You CANT have it both ways...either there is a force our rule or their isnt. You cant cry every time the rule works against you and then applaud the rule when it works for you...geezus...

[Kelly the Dog]

Lets say there is a tipped pass in the endzone. The WR falls to the ground. The DB falls on top of him. He has one foot touching the ground and his other is laying across the ankle of the WR. The ball plops down into the DBs hands, and pulls it into his chest. Two seconds go by. The officials are not going to already blow the whistle and signal INT? Another player comes charging in and blasts the DB off of the WRs body and it lands two yards away OB. They are not going to call that a INT? Of course they would. They would blow it dead with clear possession of the ball with his entire body in the endzone. It may not be the letter of the rule but they would blow it dead if his whole body was in bounds and he caught the ball.

[Alphadawg7]

Lets say there is a tipped pass in the endzone. The WR falls to the ground. The DB falls on top of him. He has one foot touching the ground and his other is laying across the ankle of the WR. The ball plops down into the DBs hands, and pulls it into his chest. Two seconds go by. The officials are not going to already blow the whistle and signal INT? Another player comes charging in and blasts the DB off of the WRs body and it lands two yards away OB. They are not going to call that a INT? Of course they would. They would blow it dead with clear possession of the ball with his entire body in the endzone. It may not be the letter of the rule but they would blow it dead if his whole body was in bounds and he caught the ball.

 

This doesnt even make sense...if the refs blow the whistle the play is over and can not be challenged beyond the whistle or over turned, so it becomes irrelevant and has to be called as blown which in your example would be an INT.

 

Again, trying to find the most obscure and unlikely play to disprove a rule does not actually disprove a rule. You can spend all day coming up with scenarios less likely then both you and I winning the lotto for every rule in the book. You would have a rule book that was 2,000,000 pages long and impossible to force.

 

You are really over complicating this...this play is 100% decided because of the force out rule and nothing more, nothing less...

Edited October 25, 2010 by Alphadawg7

[akm0404]

Lets say there is a tipped pass in the endzone. The WR falls to the ground. The DB falls on top of him. He has one foot touching the ground and his other is laying across the ankle of the WR. The ball plops down into the DBs hands, and pulls it into his chest. Two seconds go by. The officials are not going to already blow the whistle and signal INT? Another player comes charging in and blasts the DB off of the WRs body and it lands two yards away OB. They are not going to call that a INT? Of course they would. They would blow it dead with clear possession of the ball with his entire body in the endzone. It may not be the letter of the rule but they would blow it dead if his whole body was in bounds and he caught the ball.

 

LOL. So a player is going to catch a ball and lay on top of another player, completely supported by that player, for two full seconds with neither person moving? Then someone is going to come in and "blast" the DB, who is still laying flat on top of another human 6 full feet, somehow hitting him from below such to launch him into the air (which you think'd be hard with him being only maybe a foot off the ground while laying on the WR)...

 

There is a reason why this "hypothetical" has never come up, nor will it ever come up. Because it'll never happen.

 

But, if it does, they'll replay the call and apply the rules of the game to the situation. So, in this case, if the DB didn't didn't get two feet in bounds, or an elbow or his butt, it'll be an incompletion.

 

Don't need to over think this.

[Kelly the Dog]

This doesnt even make sense...if the refs blow the whistle the play is over and can not be challenged beyond the whistle or over turned, so it becomes irrelevant and has to be called as blown which in your example would be an INT.

 

Again, trying to find the most obscure and unlikely play to disprove a rule does not actually disprove a rule. You can spend all day coming up with scenarios less likely then both you and I winning the lotto for every rule in the book. You would have a rule book that was 2,000,000 pages long and impossible to force.

 

You are really over complicating this...this play is 100% decided because of the force out rule and nothing more, nothing less...

 

You just made my point. The refs are going to blow the whistle and end the play because the DB has full possession and his entire body in the endzone.

 

LOL. So a player is going to catch a ball and lay on top of another player, completely supported by that player, for two full seconds with neither person moving? Then someone is going to come in and "blast" the DB, who is still laying flat on top of another human 6 full feet, somehow hitting him from below such to launch him into the air (which you think'd be hard with him being only maybe a foot off the ground while laying on the WR)...

 

There is a reason why this "hypothetical" has never come up, nor will it ever come up. Because it'll never happen.

 

But, if it does, they'll replay the call and apply the rules of the game to the situation. So, in this case, if the DB didn't didn't get two feet in bounds, or an elbow or his butt, it'll be an incompletion.

 

Don't need to over think this.

 

Again, the point is, it's never going to happen because the refs are going to blow the whistle and end the play because the guy has possession of the ball and is in the endzone. He doesn't have two feet down but they are still going to blow the whistle because he's in bounds.

[Alphadawg7]

You just made my point. The refs are going to blow the whistle and end the play because the DB has full possession and his entire body in the endzone.

 

 

 

Again, the point is, it's never going to happen because the refs are going to blow the whistle and end the play because the guy has possession of the ball and is in the endzone. He doesn't have two feet down but they are still going to blow the whistle because he's in bounds.

 

Come on now, how did I make your point? YOU said the Refs blew the whistle in your example, I replied to the EXACT scenario you painted where the ref MISTAKENLY blew the whistle in which everything else will no longer matter based on the NFL rules regarding the whistle being blown. Your example kills itself with the blowing of the whistle making all the action irrelevant.

 

NO WHISTLES were blown in the Corner INT discussion and has no relevance what so ever on the rule, the play, or the replay and lack of reversal. You might as well add that a space ship came down after the whistle and beemed the everyone away except the DB making the INT as its just as irrelevant as anything else that would happen after a blown whistle.

 

The funniest part about this is that in order to try and make your argument you are using a MISTAKENLY blown whistle by a ref. What makes even less sense is that there is no whistle play in the play under discussion.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Alphadawg7

[akm0404]

You just made my point. The refs are going to blow the whistle and end the play because the DB has full possession and his entire body in the endzone.

 

 

 

Again, the point is, it's never going to happen because the refs are going to blow the whistle and end the play because the guy has possession of the ball and is in the endzone. He doesn't have two feet down but they are still going to blow the whistle because he's in bounds.

 

Pull the rip cord, sir, this is starting to get away from you.

 

Corner jumped into the air, caught the ball, and was pulled down out of bounds with one of his feet landing on the Ravens WR. Nobody was laying on anyone, nobody was spooning with another player for two seconds. It was just an incomplete pass (following some uncalled offensive pass interference).

[Buff the Cat]

You just made my point. The refs are going to blow the whistle and end the play because the DB has full possession and his entire body in the endzone.

 

I think you missed the point above, the ref is going to blow the whistle for a few reasons and none of them have to do with possession or his physical body. As both are laying there for 2 full seconds without moving or making progress, the ref will blow the whistle to stop play for these reasons. 1) The player with said ball has given up futher progress 2) the saftey of the player, not good to have a guy hit while prone on another player after they have been laying there for a bit not trying to making forward progress, in this scenario forward progress would be establishing another foot or body part down. As a result of the whistle the officials would THEN determine whether the defender had the ball inbounds. Which in this unlikely scenario would be "yes" because it would be ruled a tackle by the receiver and play was whistled dead with both players in bound.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Buff the Cat

[Kelly the Dog]

Come on now, how did I make your point? YOU said the Refs blew the whistle in your example, I replied to the EXACT scenario you painted where the ref MISTAKENLY blew the whistle in which everything else will no longer matter based on the NFL rules regarding the whistle being blown. Your example kills itself with the blowing of the whistle making all the action irrelevant.

 

NO WHISTLES were blown in the Corner INT discussion and has no relevance what so ever on the rule, the play, or the replay and lack of reversal. You might as well add that a space ship came down after the whistle and beemed the everyone away except the DB making the INT as its just as irrelevant as anything else that would happen after a blown whistle.

 

The funniest part about this is that in order to try and make your argument you are using a MISTAKENLY blown whistle by a ref. What makes even less sense is that there is no whistle play in the play under discussion.

 

So you're saying that you think an official would wait and not blow his whistle until the defender put his second foot down? No way, IMO. The whistle would be blown as soon as the ball was cradled securely into the DBs arms, like you inferred it would.

[pkwwjd]

Another point that has been lost in all of this is the "Dead Patriot Laying Out of Bounds Thus Negating Recovery of Fumbles by Bills Rule" ... if Boldin is touching the white line in any way, while touching Corner (before Corner has established possession), then Corner is ruled out of bounds. I haven't gone back to look at the play, but by my recollection that is definitely a possibility.

[Kelly the Dog]

I think you missed the point above, the ref is going to blow the whistle for a few reasons and none of them have to do with possession or his physical body. As both are laying there for 2 full seconds without moving or making progress, the ref will blow the whistle to stop play for these reasons. 1) The player with said ball has given up futher progress 2) the saftey of the player, not good to have a guy hit while prone on another player after they have been laying there for a bit not trying to making forward progress, in this scenario forward progress would be establishing another foot or body part down. As a result of the whistle the officials would THEN determine whether the defender had the ball inbounds. Which in this unlikely scenario would be "yes" because it would be ruled a tackle by the receiver and play was whistled dead with both players in bound.

 

I agree with all of that. The point I'm making is if a player the DB is laying in the endzone, two yards in bounds, with the ball secure in his arms. one leg is on the ground and the other is laying across the WR beneath him, they will blow the whistle and signal INT. They're not going to wait until he moves his leg off the WRs and touches it to the ground.

[akm0404]

It was obviously not an interception. The referee ruled it as such, and the call was not challenged so you can assume that the Bills also agreed that it was an obvious incompletion. They know the rules, and they applied them correctly.

 

I know it makes us sad because it would have been a real nice play, but all the hypotheticals in the world doesn't change anything.

[Buff the Cat]

I agree with all of that. The point I'm making is if a player the DB is laying in the endzone, two yards in bounds, with the ball secure in his arms. one leg is on the ground and the other is laying across the WR beneath him, they will blow the whistle and signal INT. They're not going to wait until he moves his leg off the WRs and touches it to the ground.

 

This is true, unfortunately in the Bills game the ref did not blow the whistle. Thus the play continued and he was forced out of bounds.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Buff the Cat

[akm0404]

I agree with all of that. The point I'm making is if a player the DB is laying in the endzone, two yards in bounds, with the ball secure in his arms. one leg is on the ground and the other is laying across the WR beneath him, they will blow the whistle and signal INT. They're not going to wait until he moves his leg off the WRs and touches it to the ground.

 

Another rule you should brush up on in conjunction with your crazy hypotheticals is the implications of being down by contact and how the rules differ when a player goes to the air to make a catch, vs. when they possess the ball in the field of play.

[Kelly the Dog]

Pull the rip cord, sir, this is starting to get away from you.

 

Corner jumped into the air, caught the ball, and was pulled down out of bounds with one of his feet landing on the Ravens WR. Nobody was laying on anyone, nobody was spooning with another player for two seconds. It was just an incomplete pass (following some uncalled offensive pass interference).

Why get in this conversation if you haven't read the previous posts or can't understand them? I always said the refs made the right call on Corner according to the rules. Always. Always.

[akm0404]

New tackling strategy in the NFL when near the sidelines or at the edges of the endzoness...... Instead of tackling a player with the ball, pick them up and carry them out of bounds, OR pick them up stopping forward progress, and then holding them in the air until 3 other players can come over and work the ball loose.

 

This is a common stance taken by folks that do not understand the rules.

 

A player can be forced out of a boundary using any legal means of contact. Picking up a player and carrying them is not, nor has it ever been, a legal means of contact.

[NaPolian8693]

How the heck are players all of a sudden going to start carrying other players around? This whole discussion is absurd. It's hard enough to tackle someone at all in the NFL, let alone securely grab a hold or someone and carry them around without them wriggling free and without tipping over.